Dolan v. Negron, 51 Fla. L. Weekly D795 (Fla. 4th DCA Apr. 15, 2026):

The case arose from a crash where the defendant pulled onto the right shoulder and then suddenly turned back onto the road, colliding with the plaintiff’s box truck. The plaintiff declined ambulance transport but went to the ER a few hours later with severe neck and back pain and spasms.

The plaintiff had experienced fairly serious injuries in two different accidents that occurred in the five years before this one. The plaintiff’s doctors testified that the surgery the plaintiff underwent resulted from this accident, but the defendant’s doctors testified there were no meaningful differences between the MRIs before and after the subject incident and that there was no objective evidence of permanent injury sustained.

A jury awarded the plaintiff $1,000,000 ($32,000 for past meds, $478,500 for future meds, $161,000 for past lost earnings and $328,500 for future earning capacity) but found the plaintiff did not sustain a permanent injury.

On appeal, the court held several of the economic damages awarded were excessive and unsupported, especially the $161,000 in past lost earnings where the plaintiff offered no evidence tying all periods of unemployment/reduced hours over four years to the subject incident.

The court also reversed the substantial future damage award as excessive in light of the no-permanency finding, explaining that while permanency is not always a prerequisite to future economic damages, it is a significant factor in establishing reasonable certainty. The court found the jury’s verdict could not be reconciled with the evidence, requiring a new trial.

Because the damages issues were intertwined and the verdict looked compromised, the court reversed and remanded for a new trial on permanency and all damages issues.